Americans are not good at giving away their territorial possessions, few though they've had. The renunciation of their ownership of the Panama Canal Zone has been handled with as much grace as a sack of potatoes.
Refusing to attend if the ceremony were held at noon today as the treaty mandates, the celebratory party was advanced a couple of weeks to mid-December.
Even then, only ex-president Jimmy Carter, who in 1977 negotiated the treaty ending US jurisdiction, made the relatively short journey.
New situation, but the same reflexes.
In the words of Ronald Reagan, who helped nearly cripple the young Carter presidency with a vitriolic anti-Canal Treaty campaign: "We built it, we paid for it, it's ours."
But, despite all the second thoughts in Washington and the whispering campaign about a future Chinese grab for the canal via the Hong Kong company that has won the lease to run the ports at either end of the great international waterway, the canal will be formally in Panama's hands by the afternoon of the last day of the millennium.
The substance will have finally changed; alas, the style has not.
In 1903 all the White House had to do, without consulting any Panamanians, was to contact the editor of the New York World and ask him to publish a communique. It read: "Information has reached this city that the state of Panama stands ready to secede from Colombia and enter into a canal treaty with the US."
Six months later a rebellion was duly organized to firm up the secession and the first canal treaty was signed -- without bothering to ask for the Panamanian signature, although it granted the US in perpetuity all rights and authority in the canal zone "which it would possess if it were sovereign to the territory."
It was an unsustainable interposition in a now largely decolo-nized world. And it was to Carter's credit that he realized that the canal hung like an albatross around the US' neck -- even though his timing was naively wrong, given the then priority of wooing the Senate to ratify the upcoming arms control treaties with the Soviet Union.
US ownership of the canal zone not only was poisoning Washington's relationship with the proud and eminently successful state of Panama -- which had achieved by this time a level of all round economic and social well-being second to none in Latin America -- it complicated US dealings with all of Latin America.
Rightly, these proud and headstrong countries who had fought so hard in the previous century to win their independence from Spain and Portugal, had a profound hostility to gringo colonialism.
The bitterness ran very deep. A taste of it can be found in Graham Greene's chronicle entitled Getting to Know the General.
In it Greene recounts one of his many intimate conversations with General Omar Torrijos, the military president who negotiated the Panama Canal Treaty face to face with Carter.
"The Canal is easy to sabotage," said Torrijos. "Blow a hole in the Gatun dam and the canal will drain down to the Atlantic. It would take only a few days to mend the dam, but it would take three years of rain to fill the canal. During that time it would be guerrilla war waged from the jungle." (The forest and mountains that link Panama and Colombia are among the most impenetrable in the world; and all attempts to link the two countries with a road have failed.)
Greene became the friend and confidante of Torrijos during the difficult days of the treaty negotiations.
He observed that Torrijos "would not be entirely unhappy if the US Senate refused to ratify the Treaty (as it nearly did). He would be left with the simple solution of violence, which had often been in his mind, with desire and appre-hension balanced as in a sexual encounter."
Torrijos died in a mysterious plane crash and was succeeded by Manuel Noriega, his friend and fellow party-giver, who also enjoyed the juxtaposition of sex and violence, authenticating his masculinity with the urge to tell the US to go and be damned.
But, unlike Torrijos, he was corrupted by the drug trade and Washington was able to build a case against him that at least convinced itself, if less others, that the US was within its rights, as the protector of free passage in the canal, to depose this malevolent and unstable character.
In due course Noriega was sentenced in a Florida court and remains incarcerated.
That the US got away with this without provoking a serious reaction in Panama was because of Carter's earlier success (although the then president George Bush would never have admitted to it).
It had defused Panamanian hostility and indeed measurably improved Washington's fraught relationship with the whole of Latin America.
It is more the pity that present day Washington seems intent on throwing away Carter's legacy.
The US should be stepping out of Panama with style and its head high. George Bush, Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton himself should all be there today to salute the transition.
It will be an historic opportunity missed. And the rest of the world will see it as one more of many recent instances of the Clinton administration demonstrating the arrogance of power.
Jonathan Power is a freelance columnist based in London.
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence. Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk —
RSS